Latin prayers

[Ascanio1]

deleted

[Ascanio1]

This book might be overkill, but it might be what you're looking for. It's "pocket-sized" and has many prayers in Latin and English, mostly in one place:https://angeluspress.org/products/christian-warfare
Has all of the following in English and Latin:
p. 1 - Sign of the Cross; The Our Father; The Hail Mary
p. 2 - The Apostles' Creed; Glory Be
p. 3 - The Confiteor
pp. 4-5 - The Angelus
p. 5 - The Regina Caeli
p. 6 - Prayer to the Holy Ghost; Prayer before Meals
pp. 6-7 - Grace after Meals
p. 7 - The Miraculous Medal Prayer
p. 8 - Daily Consecration to Our Lady
pp. 23-56 - Mass Ordinary
(But it's not a Missal, so it doesn't contain any of the Propers.)
p. 189 - Saint Michael prayer (short version)
p. 195 - Angel of God prayer
It does not contain the Acts of Faith, Hope, Charity, or Contrition in Latin, though it does give these in English (p. 7, 9-10)

Thank you. I will keep it in mind. It seems a very good solution.


--------------------------------

Try out this website, Ascaio: Thesaurus Precum Latinarum. It has dozens of Latin prayers indexed. You might find it useful.

Thank you! That website is excellent for a digital platform and I have already bookmarked it! Thank you!


--------------------------

@ Fleur-de-Lys,

Why, thank you!   

It was really helpful! Yes, both these two missals contain the preayers that I seek except the Ludate Domine (Gloria Patri) that I did not see but I am sure will be there, somewhere. I saw also the prayers for the dead and other that I was looking for.



In my Chapel we pray before and after Mass. Before Mass, our lay congregation leader leads us into the Rosary prayer but adds or removes prayers, according to specific (if any) requests by the faithful on that particular day. So I find it really challenging to follow properly, as I do not know these prayers off by heart (not even the Pater Noster or Hail Mary) and, hence, I need to find them quickly.

I am new to Catholic liturgy (for 40 years I attended the reformist liturgy) so I need time to learn them all.

I found a 1937 Fr Lasance missal at home but it has very few Latin prayers with the important in English only so I will have to replace it (or add a Latin prayers booklet).



Given your advice I will buy the Angelus Press even if a kind and knowledgeable lady, from Kansas, with whom I have the great pleasure of corresponding, commented that there are places to beware of, in the Angelus Press missal, especially in words of the Creed with surprising changes as in the rubrical notes in the first pages of the Mass and other places  as compared to the 1953 Juergens version:

The Angelus version removed the term "sacrifice" and replaced it with the term "celebrate" or "celebration".  "Priest" was replaced by "celebrant".
The Angelus version has the Creed showing several changes from the New Marian or the Fr Lasance: "of one substance with the Father" instead of "consubstantial with the Father"; "became flesh" instead of "became Incarnate"; "And on the third day" instead of "and the third day"; "He will come" instead of "He shall come"; "and of His kingdom there will be no end" instead of "of whose kingdom there shall be no end"; "I believe in the Holy Ghost" instead of "And in the Holy Ghost"; "Who proceeds from" instead of "proceeding from"; "Who spoke through the prophets" instead of "who spoke by the prophets"; "baptism for the forgiveness of sins" instead of "baptism for the remission of sins"; "I await" instead of "I expect" or "I look for". 
The Angelus version uses "Receive" instead of "Accept" at the Offertory.
The Angelus version, in the concluding doxology, uses: "through Him" instead of "by Him"; yet it retains "by Him" in the Creed and in the Last Gospel - twice;  "through him" references St. John.
The Angelus version uses the Douay-Rheims where the Editio Typica did not.

In short... I am super confused. 

I am trying my best to please God by praying as accurately and correctly as possible before, during and after Mass. But there is so much confusion that it is difficult to find the correct rubrics for each priest/chapel.

[Fleur-de-Lys]

@ Fleur-de-Lys,

Why, thank you!   

It was really helpful! Yes, both these two missals contain the preayers that I seek except the Ludate Domine (Gloria Patri) that I did not see but I am sure will be there, somewhere. I saw also the prayers for the dead and other that I was looking for.

In my Chapel we pray before and after Mass. Before Mass, our lay congregation leader leads us into the Rosary prayer but adds or removes prayers, according to specific (if any) requests by the faithful on that particular day. So I find it really challenging to follow properly, as I do not know these prayers off by heart (not even the Pater Noster or Hail Mary) and, hence, I need to find them quickly.

I am new to Catholic liturgy (for 40 years I attended the reformist liturgy) so I need time to learn them all.

I found a 1937 Fr Lasance missal at home but it has very few Latin prayers with the important in English only so I will have to replace it (or add a Latin prayers booklet).

Given your advice I will buy the Angelus Press even if a kind and knowledgeable lady, from Kansas, with whom I have the great pleasure of corresponding, commented that there are places to beware of, in the Angelus Press missal, especially in words of the Creed with surprising changes as in the rubrical notes in the first pages of the Mass and other places  as compared to the 1953 Juergens version:

It sounds as if your friend prefers a form of the liturgy that preceded the 1955 reforms. Some Traditionalists do. But most Traditionalist groups follow the 1962 liturgy. Angelus is the press of the SSPX, Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Pii X). I don't know where you attend Mass, but if your chapel is SSPX, the Angelus would contain the corresponding liturgy. I have also used this missal while attending Masses offered by the FSSP (Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Petri) and the ICKSP (Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest) and have never noticed any discrepancy. But I will respond to your friend's specific concerns:

The Angelus version removed the term "sacrifice" and replaced it with the term "celebrate" or "celebration".

I am not seeing this in my missal. I do see the word sacrifice  being used. If this was changed, I'm not finding it.

"Priest" was replaced by "celebrant".

I do see the term celebrant  being used in places. In other places I see priest.

The Angelus version has the Creed showing several changes from the New Marian or the Fr Lasance: "of one substance with the Father" instead of "consubstantial with the Father"; "became flesh" instead of "became Incarnate"; "And on the third day" instead of "and the third day"; "He will come" instead of "He shall come"; "and of His kingdom there will be no end" instead of "of whose kingdom there shall be no end"; "I believe in the Holy Ghost" instead of "And in the Holy Ghost"; "Who proceeds from" instead of "proceeding from"; "Who spoke through the prophets" instead of "who spoke by the prophets"; "baptism for the forgiveness of sins" instead of "baptism for the remission of sins"; "I await" instead of "I expect" or "I look for". 
The Angelus version uses "Receive" instead of "Accept" at the Offertory.
The Angelus version, in the concluding doxology, uses: "through Him" instead of "by Him"; yet it retains "by Him" in the Creed and in the Last Gospel - twice;  "through him" references St. John.

This is true. But honestly, as a native speaker of English, I cannot see that these changes make any difference. They are stylistic rather than substantive.

The Angelus version uses the Douay-Rheims where the Editio Typica did not.

I don't know what the Editio Typica used, but the Douay-Rheims is the pre-conciliar Church's approved translation of the Bible in English. I cannot imagine what objection there could be to using it.

In short... I am super confused. 

I am trying my best to please God by praying as accurately and correctly as possible before, during and after Mass. But there is so much confusion that it is difficult to find the correct rubrics for each priest/chapel.

Ascaio1, please, do not distress yourself over these details. Continue seeking God, and He will lead you home. You may make some honest mistakes along the way. We all do. But your heart is in the right place. May God bless you.

[Ascanio1]

... CUT ...
This is true. But honestly, as a native speaker of English, I cannot see that these changes make any difference. They are stylistic rather than substantive.

Ascaio1, please, do not distress yourself over these details. Continue seeking God, and He will lead you home. You may make some honest mistakes along the way. We all do. But your heart is in the right place. May God bless you.

Thank you for your encouragement. I appreciated it.

I went ahead and purchased the Angelus Press missal.

My chapel is in Italy, Naples. It is extremely small (18 chairs) and the faithful have to stand in the sacresty and in the adjacent room, to attend Mass. Unfortunately the curiae will not grant the SSPX a church (some sort of political power struggle) so we use a private chapel in the home of a noble neapolitan family. But one cannot even see the priest, let alone understand which rubric one is at, when the priest celebrates. Hence, the desire to at least read the Mass, as it progresses, from next door. In Kansas the SSPX raised millions of dollars and are building a beautiful church but, in Italy, we cannot raise that kind of money... 

[Vetus Ordo]

But one cannot even see the priest, let alone understand which rubric one is at, when the priest celebrates.

Don't worry.

While you have a commendable desire to follow closely what is happening at the altar, you should also know that you're not required to do so in the traditional Latin mass. There are no rubrics for the laity. You can engage in private devotions if you will, just pray attentively or simply meditate in silence.

[Prayerful]

No codified rubrics, but custom. Personally I find watching where the priest is standing, the best guide, but listening too, can be as good. At least the Mass of Ages is available to you.

[Ascanio1]

Don't worry. While you have a commendable desire to follow closely what is happening at the altar, you should also know that you're not required to do so in the traditional Latin mass. There are no rubrics for the laity. You can engage in private devotions if you will, just pray attentively or simply meditate in silence.

I have just returned to Catholic Mass recently so, please, forgive my ignorance (I'm studying catechism all over again). I am not being sarcastic or ironic, I'm genuinely confused: do you mean that the faithful are not required to:
(i) understand the Mass and prayers,
(ii) respond appropriately, when required and
(iii) generally follow the Mass (you suggest engaging in private devotions)?
I thought that such a behaviour would make the attendance invalid.

No codified rubrics, but custom.

Can you please explain this phrase? I may have misunderstood your meaning.

-----------------

Sorry for asking an OT question: who is the forum moderator and how do I contact him? I made a mistake in my username and I would like to ask if it can be corrected.

[Vetus Ordo]

I'm genuinely confused: do you mean that the faithful are not required to:
(i) understand the Mass and prayers,
(ii) respond appropriately, when required and
(iii) generally follow the Mass (you suggest engaging in private devotions)?
I thought that such a behaviour would make the attendance invalid.

(i) Definitely, it is encouraged that the faithful should understand the mass and what prayers are being said but it is not required. Prior to the 20th century, most people just prayed the rosary during mass or stood around in the church doing their own devotions like many Orthodox still do to this day;
(ii) It is customary to respond to the priest in the dialogue form of the TLM but it is not required. Only the server is required to respond. For centuries no-one but the servers themselves responded to the priest in the altar;
(iii) You can follow the mass with your hand missal or engage in any private devotion. It is entirely up to you.

Attendance is not valid or invalid. Rather, it is worthy or unworthy. A worthy attendance does not depend on you knowing the correct responses and postures or which prayers are being said by the priest, it depends solely on your inner disposition to adore God.

No codified rubrics, but custom.

Can you please explain this phrase? I may have misunderstood your meaning.

What Prayerful was stating is that there are no codified rubrics for the laity in the TLM. In other words, there's nothing prescribed in the books for what you should do as a layman when attending mass. However, there is local custom, such as answering the priest in the dialogue form of the TLM, standing to hear the Gospel, etc. While local custom should be followed, it is not strictly speaking obligatory.

[Ascanio1]

I'm genuinely confused: do you mean that the faithful are not required to:
(i) understand the Mass and prayers,
(ii) respond appropriately, when required and
(iii) generally follow the Mass (you suggest engaging in private devotions)?
I thought that such a behaviour would make the attendance invalid.

(i) Definitely, it is encouraged that the faithful should understand the mass and what prayers are being said but it is not required. Prior to the 20th century, most people just prayed the rosary during mass or stood around in the church doing their own devotions like many Orthodox still do to this day;
(ii) It is customary to respond to the priest in the dialogue form of the TLM but it is not required. Only the server is required to respond. For centuries no-one but the servers themselves responded to the priest in the altar;
(iii) You can follow the mass with your hand missal or engage in any private devotion. It is entirely up to you.

Attendance is not valid or invalid. Rather, it is worthy or unworthy. A worthy attendance does not depend on you knowing the correct responses and postures or which prayers are being said by the priest, it depends solely on your inner disposition to adore God.

No codified rubrics, but custom.

Can you please explain this phrase? I may have misunderstood your meaning.

What Prayerful was stating is that there are no codified rubrics for the laity in the TLM. In other words, there's nothing prescribed in the books for what you should do as a layman when attending mass. However, there is local custom, such as answering the priest in the dialogue form of the TLM, standing to hear the Gospel, etc. While local custom should be followed, it is not strictly speaking obligatory.

I was unaware of all these matters. Thank you for sharing your time and knowledge with me. I appreciated both.

Do you know who the forum owner or moderator is and how to contact him?

Again, thank you for your time.

[Fleur-de-Lys]

The forum owner is Kaesekopf. You can send him a PM (personal message).

[Lynne]

There was a beautiful blog years ago called Ars Orandi(?) and shortly before they shut down, they covered this topic. I'm going to attach a couple of files which cover the type of devotion that one *can* do. It certainly is not required...

[Ascanio1]

The forum owner is Kaesekopf. You can send him a PM (personal message).

Thank you. I contacted him and he was helpful.

[Ascanio1]

There was a beautiful blog years ago called Ars Orandi(?) and shortly before they shut down, they covered this topic. I'm going to attach a couple of files which cover the type of devotion that one *can* do. It certainly is not required...

Thank you for your time and sharing knowledge. I printed both and used one today.

I remain somewhat surprised that the Church, during the millenia, did not encourage the faithful to participate with full knowledge of the liturgy and that traditional Catholics are not required, still today, to follow the Mass with full knowledge.

While I appreciate the advantages and importance of the use of Latin in the public act, I cannot quite understant why it would not benefit even more to have a translation of the Latin rubrics so as to allow the faithful to follow accurately and pray meaningfully. Surely understanding can only enhance the benefits ...

I imagine that before the press became commonplace and unexpensive there was a cost/practical barrier but, later?

Can you, or other knowledgeable members, please, explain the logic or the doctrine that undelies this?

[Vetus Ordo]

I remain somewhat surprised that the Church, during the millenia, did not encourage the faithful to participate with full knowledge of the liturgy and that traditional Catholics are not required, still today, to follow the Mass with full knowledge.

While I appreciate the advantages and importance of the use of Latin in the public act, I cannot quite understant why it would not benefit even more to have a translation of the Latin rubrics so as to allow the faithful to follow accurately and pray meaningfully. Surely understanding can only enhance the benefits ...

I imagine that before the press became commonplace and unexpensive there was a cost/practical barrier but, later?

Can you, or other knowledgeable members, please, explain the logic or the doctrine that undelies this?

According to Catholic theology, the mass is the action of the celebrant. It is the priest alone who in persona Christi offers up the Eucharistic sacrifice to God on behalf of the living and the dead. It is he who officiates the public worship of the Church. It is not necessary that the faithful understand what the celebrant is praying at the altar to draw the spiritual benefits from it. Only the priest offers the mass, the faithful merely attend. It is not even necessary that anyone be present at all but the priest. I'm sure you must have noticed the side altars in some of the bigger churches. Those are usually for private masses. In fact, in the reformed rite of 1969 it's still possible to celebrate masses without anyone present but the priest, although that practice has fallen into disuse.

After the invention of the movable-type printing press, there was a flourishing of missalettes (or hand missals) for the faithful who were literate, as well as other devotional materials to help them meditate on the sacred mysteries. After the pontificate of St. Pius X in the beginning of the 20th century, the movement to bring about a more active participation of the faithful in the public liturgy of the Church gained momentum. You saw for the first time, probably in more than 1500 years, a dialogue form of the mass where the laymen also responded to the priest along with the servers at the altar. This is the most common form of the TLM that exists today in traditional chapels and churches, although I've personally attended a TLM once that was not in the dialogue form.

Eventually, the push to have a true congregational participation in the liturgy resulted in a profound reformation of the Roman rite after the Second Vatican Council, that included the option to have the whole liturgy in the vernacular with simplified texts and other changes that reflected the new ecumenical direction that the Church was aiming for.

[Ascanio1]

According to Catholic theology, the mass is the action of the celebrant. It is the priest alone who in persona Christi offers up the Eucharistic sacrifice to God on behalf of the living and the dead. It is he who officiates the public worship of the Church. It is not necessary that the faithful understand what the celebrant is praying at the altar to draw the spiritual benefits from it. Only the priest offers the mass, the faithful merely attend. It is not even necessary that anyone be present at all but the priest. I'm sure you must have noticed the side altars in some of the bigger churches. Those are usually for private masses. In fact, in the reformed rite of 1969 it's still possible to celebrate masses without anyone present but the priest, although that practice has fallen into disuse.

After the invention of the movable-type printing press, there was a flourishing of missalettes (or hand missals) for the faithful who were literate, as well as other devotional materials to help them meditate on the sacred mysteries. After the pontificate of St. Pius X in the beginning of the 20th century, the movement to bring about a more active participation of the faithful in the public liturgy of the Church gained momentum. You saw for the first time, probably in more than 1500 years, a dialogue form of the mass where the laymen also responded to the priest along with the servers at the altar. This is the most common form of the TLM that exists today in traditional chapels and churches, although I've personally attended a TLM once that was not in the dialogue form.

Eventually, the push to have a true congregational participation in the liturgy resulted in a profound reformation of the Roman rite after the Second Vatican Council, that included the option to have the whole liturgy in the vernacular with simplified texts and other changes that reflected the new ecumenical direction that the Church was aiming for.

Thank you. Your reply was very informative. I appreciate that you took your time to help me.

Given your explanation, I must question my assumption that understanding and participating in the liturgy may benefit the soul. Why would the Church not have done something about it, well before V2?

What does our pre-V2 doctrine state on the matter of benefit for the soul (not mere precept)? Was there a debate amongst our Church's learned scholars regariding the matter of benefit for the soul? My interest is limited to the benefit to the soul rather than else.

As I understand (but I have just arrived to Catholicism) the motives behind V2 reforms were not so much for the benefit of the soul as much as for modernization, ecumenism, etc..

What is your, personal, opinion? Is it beneficial for the faithful's soul to understand the liturgy and participate in the dialogue?

PS: You are accurate and correct re side altars. In my city (Naples, Italy) in all major churches and basilicas, side altars are still privately owned by noble families and (Novus Ordo) Mass is still being celebrated by priests, alone, in suffrage of the dead that specific family. Very old trusts (centuries old) still exist that were set up by families with the exclusive objective of generating income to pay religious orders for perpetual celebration of Mass, over generations, to provide indulgencies for the souls of that specific family. Such trusts are still being incorporated in Naples and the proceeds are still used to pay for masses for the dead of a specific family. Another way to guarantee indulgencies for the dead of a family, still is for that family to donate an asset to a religious order in exchange for masses in perpetuity.